In the aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370, it has become evident that the narrative peddled by a certain section of liberals is extremely conducive to Pakistani interests. Furthermore, it was revealed earlier today by none other than Abdul Basit, former Pakistani High Commissioner to India, that he had managed to influence Shobhaa De into furthering the Pakistani agenda in an article and advocating for plebiscite in Kashmir.
In an earlier article, we had demonstrated how certain sections of the political fraternity and media community appear to be working in tandem with Pakistan and undermining Indian national interests. Now, people have started questioning and have been indulging in speculations regarding why Abdul Basit chose that particular moment to give up someone who had collaborated with him.
Basit was clever by half there. He knows most big guns in Indian media are sympathetic to Kashmir’s “Azadi gang” & Pakistan. He deliberately threw only a minion like De under the bus shielding others who matter more to Pak
Because @DeShobhaa has served the purpose and others more useful have picked up the baton and are serving their masters now. Useful idiots are useful only up to a point after which other useful idiots are recruited https://t.co/P4I2nFqUVk
Well @DeShobhaa is what she is. Interesting thing is why did Abdul Basit expose only her? Many more Indian journalists speak Pak language on almost every issue. @BDUTT is working hard against #Article370
Still why only Shobha De is being exposed? What was the reason for fallout?
The speculations above assume that Pakistan is a rational actor. There’s a significant reason to doubt that particular assumption, however, we have to concede that Pakistan does operate along rational lines at least at an extremely basic sense as far as spreading propaganda against India is concerned. Therefore, we have to ask ourselves the question here, why did Basit give up one of his contacts?
In a game of chess, there are only two reasons why one sacrifices one of his own pieces. Firstly, the piece might have become a liability. Or, the individual stands to gain more by sacrificing it. In this particular instance, the former appears unlikely although one has to admit there might be internal conflicts we may not be aware of. The latter, however, is an extremely likely possibility.
It is perhaps an unsaid threat to others who have collaborated with them in the past. Pakistan is isolated globally today and even the Muslim world appears to have abandoned them. Under such circumstances, some Indians who have collaborated with them in the past might have gotten the idea that they could pursue a hard bargain with Pakistan in exchange for their services. They were under the impression that they could take advantage of a desperate Pakistani establishment.
If that is indeed the case, the move by Pakistani is simultaneously reckless and effective. One hand, they have driven home the message that collaborators should not take them for granted and there were definitive ways in which they could still hurt their credentials. On the other hand, they have probably alienated some who were open to the idea of working with them for benefits.
All things considered, it does appear to be the move of a mafia that has its back against the wall and is desperate to retain the few allies that it already has. We have to entertain the possibility that there are numerous other significant people in Khan Market, with considerably more influence, who have collaborated with Pakistan in the past. Pulling the rug on Shobhaa De, who no longer wields any influence, was Pakistan’s way of sending a message to the rest. Thus, Pakistan appears to have made strategic gains by sacrificing one of its pieces.
For Indian authorities, it means that there are certainly big players in Khan Market who have been covertly undermining Indian national interests at Pakistan’s behest. Indian intelligence agencies, and the Home Ministry, certainly have their own ideas on the identity of these individuals.
Another aspect of things that the Indian government ought to consider is the possibility of Indian politicians collaborating with Pakistanis. On the basis of certain statements that have been made, it appears that some politicians consider power to be more important than national interests. More so than media personalities, politicians stand to gain significantly by collaborating with foreign interests. Therefore, it’s even more important that these individuals are identified.
Nevertheless, Abdul Basit’s statement is reason enough for the Indian government to initiate high-level investigations into Pakistani collaborators in India. It is important that Pakistanis moles are identified and prevented access to any significant authority within the government. Since 2014, the Indian government appears to have been fairly successful in doing that.
Politicians with a troubling affinity toward Pakistan have been exposed and their political parties have suffered the consequences in elections. Likewise, the media personalities no longer carry the same weight as they did prior to 2014. However, it might time to initiate legal proceedings against such individuals for undermining national interests and collaborating with a sworn enemy of the Indian state.
In times of conflict, even the act of speaking the simplest of the truth is an act of bravery. And in the age of hypocrisy, even an act of chanting a religious chant is a war cry. That is what they have turned ‘Jai Shri Ram’ into- a violent, war cry. As I read ‘The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World’, I find uncanny resemblance to our times and our world.
The old Hindu India which has long been the most accommodative and peaceful of all the people, is suddenly being demonized. Between the two monotheist religions out to conquer the world, Hinduism with acceptance of all faiths, openness to believe in several dimensions of a single truth, has stood like a sore thumb. Much like Paganism of Romans about which Catherine Nixey has written so elegantly written in this book of hers, Hinduism is not able to understand the hatred of those who attack it. We think it is politics, hypocrisy, intellectual opportunism. We call it all names except what it is. Monotheists hate any competing faith. While polytheism is not by nature very orthodox, fanatical and dogmatic; for monotheism, any faith which is not that faith is a sin. When one says it, it offends many. But this actually explains the amount of antagonism that attacks Hinduism, every day, day after day.
Monotheist cannot understand a religion which does not think any other competing religion as sin, which does not want to win more geographies. For them, for imperialistic religions, a faith steeped in philosophy is strange. Apart of confusion which prompts negative narratives, there is a tried and tested way to convert people from the competing faiths and eventually erase them from the face of earth. What this book tells us is that not only is the erstwhile religion erased from the Earth, the memories of the brazen and brutal act itself has been erased from public memories. Although factually, we can historically put the finger on the actual arrival of both Islam and Christianity, is it not amusing that when we look at historical evidence of any religion pre-dating them, we largely encounter darkness and silence. Very little has survived the Christian onslaught in terms of literature and history from the Roman times, in terms of religion. If one reads through the largely sanitized literature from Roman times, one would believe that either they had no religion or faith or that they abandoned it en-masse out of free will. Nothing can be further from the truth as we read this book, which stands out not only for the brilliant writing but also for extraordinary honesty.
Author Catherine Nixey
We are generally made to believe that while the Christians braved all kinds of atrocities at the hands of the Pagans; Christians, once they attained a position of power, merely relied on logical debate and inherent dissatisfaction of the Pagans to get them converted in such numbers that no Pagan was left behind. This book destroys the myth. We have often been made to believe that the demolishing of temples by the past Islamist invaders had nothing to do with religion. But when we read the Roman History, we can see the pattern. Although our historians who try too hard to make us forget the religious fanaticism of the invaders, it is not too difficult to imagine with immeasurable wealth, plenty of lands and a rich supply of artisan; why they did not try to build the monuments of their faith afresh in Ayodhya, Mathura or Kashi, considered by Hindus to be an axis to Hindu faith. Hinduism as a faith, hinges significantly on buildings, idols and structures. When you break these structures, you trample on a faith. This explains also the adamant opposition of the return of Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura. Amid all the big talks of secularism, the comparative significance of the three sites for Hindus and Muslims. All three have great religious significance for Hindus while for Muslims, they are at best of historic significance. These structures for the Muslims are nothing but a brutal reminder of the age when they ruled over the majority. None have been erected by any of the Islamic religious figures, all three are connected deeply to Hindu faith.
When I read the prologue of the book, which starts on one afternoon in Palymra, in 385AD, with the demolition of the grand temple of Athena, I could see in my mind, the reflection of Kashi Vishvanath by the Armies of Aurangzeb. She writes, “Great stone columns that had stood for centuries collapsed in an afternoon; statues which had stood for half a millennium had their faces mutilated; temples that had seen the rise of the Roman empire fell in a single day.” I often wonder how the day after would have been for the citizens of Palmyra or the Citizens of Kashi.
Further, what makes it exceptionally great read is the quotes which often appear at the beginning of chapters. It shows the clearly secular view of the Pagans and blatantly bigoted view of the early Christians. For instance she quotes Pagan author Symmachus- “We see the same sky, the sky shared by us all, the same world surrounds us. What does it matter what wisdom a person uses to seek for the truth.”; and in contrast, we read St. Augustine- “That all superstition of Pagans and heathens should be annihilated is what God wants, God commands, God proclaims.”
The Darkening Age- The Christian Destruction of the Classical World
While Pagans advocate accommodation, Christians advocate annihilation. It always begins slowly, silently. The first Christian emperor, Constantine, did not ask all the non-Christians to be annihilated as St Augustine wanted. He spoke of coexistence, asked for the Pagans to be ‘spared’. That was some Ganga Jamuni civilization in AD 312. But what he did do was stop supporting the Pagan Temples, annexed their riches, taxed their festival, made the Church exempt of taxes. It was too early for brute establishment of the empire so it worked from the other side. It made the practice of Paganism difficult, incentivized the conversion to Christianity. In the next two centuries, supported by the State, Christianity flourished and Paganism declined.
In AD391, Law was passed by Emperor Theodosius stating- ‘No person shall be granted rights to perform sacrifices; no person shall go around the temples, no person shall revere the shrines.’ In AD 399 came another law, which said, ‘If there should be any temples in the Country districts, they shall be torn down without disturbance and tumult. For when they are torn down, the material basis for all superstitions will be destroyed.’ Do we hear the echoes of Deepavali firecracker bans, Jalikattu and Sabarimala here? Do you see how science serves the believers? By 527 AD, the annihilation was complete, when one dark night the academy (yes, the one where once Plato taught) was closed and Damascius with his band of Philosophers escaped the civilization of the Book, where nothing was left for debate or discussion.
In AD529 came the Royal decree, that “all those who laboured under the insanity of Paganism- would no longer be allowed to teach. It was further mandated that anyone who had not yet baptized was to come forward and make themselves known at the holy churches immediately, or face exile. And if anyone allowed themselves to be baptized and then slipped back into their old Pagan ways, they would be executed.” So for Damascius and fellow philosophers, it meant they could no longer worship their Gods, make their living. In the year 532AD, they eventually moved and thus the curtain of darkness rolled over a religion which had lived in Rome since eternity. Most of what Damascius wrote has been erased (Macaulay was not doing something new. The path Romila Thapar and gang pursued was long tried and tested), but occasional quotes remain. At one place he wrote that his entire way of life was being ‘swept by the torrent.’ Another philosopher from the time wrote- “We are men reduced to ashes..for today everything is turned upside down.”
The Pagans did not die at one stroke. They watched, they tried to reason, they suffered and then gave away. Nothing that was written then remains in original form. Catherine calls what poses as original roman writing as Palimpsest. How often do we see Indologists lament non-availability of original Vedic scripture? It is not only because much wasn’t written. It is also because most of what was written was either erased or mistranslated, leaving us with our own Palimpsest. The last copy of Cicero’s De Republica was written over by St Augustine. The work of Democritius was erased. Do we know when Missionaries arrived in Kerala, they launched a set of four Christian Vedas? Blame Brahmins for all their orthodoxy, but unlike Damascius, they were able to preserve Indian history and thought. That could be a reason for being the target of all the hatred.
This is how a great Civilization fell. It wasn’t an easy win. Romans, writes Ms. Nixey, were no Christians-in-waiting. The discrimination started slow, and was practiced with impunity under the garb of inherent secularism of a polytheist faith. In AD 312, the Church was exempt of taxes, Bishops were paid five times as much as the Professors and six times as much as the doctors. Apart from economic measures, efforts were made to discredit the tradition. Catherine Nixey mentions Augustine’s quote- “All the pagans where under the power of demons. Temples were built to demons, altars were set up to demons, priests ordained for the service of demons.” I can almost hear a John Dayal sermonizing on Sabarimala.
Just like PFI to the SDPI, the Church started setting up their own militia, the dreaded parabalani. And in AD 415, they did an act which was to stand like an ultimatum to the intellectuals in Christian world. A famed philosopher and renowned mathematician, Hypatia of Alexandria was mob-lynched in the most dreaded fashion on the streets of the city. The great Temple of Serapis was already razed to ground. Hypatia was charged with Atheizing Alexandria. The men of church, grabbed her in the street, the greatest woman intellectual of her times, stripped her naked, dragger her to a church, used broken pieces of pottery to flay her skin and while she gasped for her life, gouged her eyes.
A pagan India in Rigvedic period had Devahuti, daughter of Manu, contributing hymns to the Vedas. When you have to discredit a Pagan religion like Hinduism, you have to write fiction like Leila; when you have to understand the truth of a fanatic faith, you just need to read the truth. I did check some reviews of the book. They were recommendatory but hesitating. Possibly, Christianity allows for liberalism only up to a point. For instance, The Guardian review is largely positive, but then, the complaint- the book does not talk of atrocities on early Christian. In reality, Catherine Nixey does mention that. She explains how the atrocities against the early Christians was much hyped.
Secondly, this book was about why the Pagan religion disappeared, in spite of atrocities supposedly committed by Romans against early Christian. How did they suddenly gained such power as to wipe out an ancient faith? She does explain that the most of the atrocities were in the reign of Nero and he was cruel equally to both Romans and Christians. The review in NY Times is much more forgiving and laudatory. Bettany Hughes writes about Catherine Nixey- “She wears her righteousness on her sleeve. This is scholarship as polemic. Nixey writes up a storm. Each sentence is rich, textured, evocative, felt. And I totally agree. I once read that a great book is one, having read which one wants to call up the writer and congratulate. This is one such book.
Senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyer has now emerged from obscurity to put out a controversial statement on the historic event of abrogation of Article 370 and bifurcation of the Jammu and Kashmir.
Venting out his anger, Congress’ election-time wonder Mani Shankar Aiyar equatedKashmir’s situation to Palestine while claiming that Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah extinguished the rights of the Kashmiris.
In an article written in Indian Express titled “Who are we to teach Kashmiris the virtues of democracy?”, Mani Shankar Aiyar has lamented over the Modi government’s decision to scrap special status to Kashmir. In doing so, Aiyar has brought up the reference of Palestine to bring equivalence to Kashmir issue.
Aiyar claims that Modi-Shah duo has learned their lessons from their mentor, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Zionists, including former Israel Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Aiyar also added that PM Modi and Amit Shah have learnt to trample on the freedom, dignity and self-respect of the Kashmiris similar to Israel, who he claims had tried to get away with seven decades of merciless oppression of the Palestinians.
Furthering his hateful propaganda, Mani Shankar Aiyer, whose hearts often bleeds for Pakistan and its terrorists, wrote that Modi-Shah has promised the Kashmiris “development” in exchange for forced integration at the point of the rifle and pellet shots into the eyes of their children.
This is not the first time that Aiyer has stood behind the terrorist state of Pakistan to foul-mouth his own country. In 2018, Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar had courted a controversy after he had claimed that he was happy with Pakistan’s policy and sad with India’s approach on the India-Pakistan issue.
Aiyer is known for his Pakistan love. In his 2015 interview to a Pakistani news channel, Aiyar had famously asked for Pakistan’s help to ‘remove’ PM Modi and bring a Congress government to power.
Following India’s historic move to strip Article Article 370, which granted a separate status to Jammu and Kashmir state and a subsequent bill aimed to bifurcate the state into two Union Territories, a certain political establishment, media and intelligentsia in the country seemed to be unhappy. The cabal of the Congress party and its cronies resorted to inciting the people of Jammu and Kashmir by deliberately toeing the Pakistani line over the issue.
With this comment, Mani Shankar Aiyer has joined the long line of Congress leaders who have started sounding like Pakistan’s spokespersons.
Earlier, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhry, the Congress party’s leader in Lok Sabha had kicked up a storm in the Assembly today after he parroted the lines of Pakistan by questioning the government whether Article 370 and the state of Jammu and Kashmir was an internal matter.
The Congress party also feared to take a stand on the issue and pandered to the sentiments of Pakistan. Digvijaya Singh had also toed the line of Pakistan by bringing equivalence to the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir and the breaking up of Pakistan to form Bangladesh.
After parroting the lines of Pakistan by questioning the Indian government over Article 370 and the state of Jammu and Kashmir, senior Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad made an atrocious comment about NSA Ajit Doval to Shopian saying he had paid money to few Kashmiris on his visit to Shopian.
Earlier today, former Union Minister and senior Congress leader P Chidambaram played his communal card when he said that the BJP scrapped special status because J&K is a Muslim majority in Kashmir. He added that had it been a Hindu majority state, the BJP would not have touched it.
As the situation in Jammu and Kashmir is gradually coming back to normal, some elements, especially Pakistanis are having a hard time to digest that normalcy is prevailing in the Valley. One Pakistani journalist, Waj Khan, in order to continue to paint gloom in Kashmir was exposed by CRPF for spreading fake news and misinformation about the condition in the state.
The malicious content of this tweet is absolutely baseless and untrue. As always, all the security forces of India are working with coordination and bonhomie. Patriotism and our tricolour lie at the core of our hearts and existence, even when the color of our uniforms may differ. pic.twitter.com/1Rhrm09dPN
Khan had tweeted that there is a rift between the Jammu and Kashmir Police and the CRPF personnel in the state as one Muslim Kashmiri Policeman killed 5 CRPF soldiers for not allowing a pregnant woman to travel as she didn’t have a curfew pass.
However, the official Twitter account of CRPF was quick to admonish the malicious lies peddled by the Pakistani journalist. Asserting that tricolour beats in the heart of all the law enforcement agencies in the country, even though their uniforms may differ, CRPF stated that the news propagated by the said Pakistani journalist is absolutely baseless and untrue. It also stated that all security agencies work in tandem and share bonhomie with each other.
Kashmir police have also dismissed the claim and have stated that the Pakistani journalist’s malicious tweet has been reported to Twitter.
Pakistan is thoroughly rattled by India’s decision to abrogate Article 370. Pakistan PM Imran Khan had warned that Pulwama kind of attacks might happen again after India’s decision. Pakistan also took its fulminations to the UNSC, only to be snubbed by its chief. The UNSC chief reminded Pakistan of the Shimla Agreement and refused to intervene in the matter claiming it’s a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.
Last week, on Monday, August 6, India struck down the partition relic of Article 370 and bifurcated the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. A curfew was imposed in the state to prevent chaos and disorder. The curfew is being relaxed or tightened in many areas in the state based on the ground situation as assessed by the security agencies.
Honestly, I am surprised, agitated, furious and even puzzled at recent focus around the 110-basis point cut in repo rates since January 2019. A recent article by Dr Bhalla for the Indian Express (you can read it by clicking here) summarized the fallacy of articles that have supported the decision of the MPC to cut policy rates by 35 basis points.
All of us should be worried and concerned regarding the way monetary policy is being formulated in the country, more so the government which is trying to revive growth through a combination of policy instruments. Without support from our monetary bosses, the job of North Block is twice as hard. In their ways, it’s trying to compensate for the same but at some point, our monetary masters will have to correct for their mistakes.
For now, let’s remind ourselves with the first lesson of economics- always look at real variables rather than nominal ones. This is extremely important for the MPC as it keeps looking at the nominal repo rates while we continue to have one of the highest real interest rates in the world.
A recent article by a commentator in Hindustan Times caught my attention as it mentioned that the MPC had little ability to stimulate growth. The author argued that a 110-basis point cut has failed to stimulate economic growth so far and therefore the monetary policy is likely to have little impact. Now here’s where I have a problem with this assessment- it’s comparing nominal interest cuts with real economic growth and trying to draw an inference. One of the reasons why the 110-bps cut have not had an impact on growth rates is because the cuts have been far too little. Let’s look at the real repo rates for instance, and the moment we look at them we find that despite the 110 bps cuts since January 2019, real repo rates have averaged higher than between May 2018 and December 2018. (refer to an earlier article on this issue by clicking here.)
Yes, real repo rates have as a matter of fact increased because inflation since January has been lower than last year. India’s real interest rates are at 2.2 per cent down from 3.43 per cent in April 2019. The average real repo rate was at 2.8 per cent during the first half of this financial year. Would someone explain how will the monetary policy have an impact on growth when instead of lowering real interest rates we have in fact increased them?
Another assertion made in the article is to do with aggregate demand being a week and therefore lowering interest rates can only have a limited role in the revival. One must remember that in the United States during the early 2000s when interest rates were lowered it led to a massive surge in consumption expenditure. The economy expanded for several years until the North Atlantic Financial Crisis occurred but there are different reasons behind the 2008 crisis. There’s evidence that cutting rates (real rates) can have a significant impact in improving consumption expenditure.
In the case of India, one must remember that while consumption has grown by approximately 50 per cent between 2013 and 2017, household debt (or personal loans) have increased by almost 90 per cent. Further, EMIs formulate a sizable proportion of expenditure for the households and therefore once real interest rates reduce, and EMIs are brought down we will have more money with households available to spend. Doing so would require EMIs and lending rates to be linked to real policy rates and therefore some banking reforms would be required to improve monetary transmission.
Irrespective of the reform, the fact remains that despite a 110-basis point cut our real interest rates have shot up and therefore we should start asking the MPC some serious questions. As far as revival of growth is concerned, one shouldn’t write off the important role of monetary policy. Getting our monetary policy is a necessary condition for sustaining a high growth rate and therefore the MPC should take a good look at the real policy rates across the world.
It has been a week since India stripped Article 370 and brought in a bill to bifurcate Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. However, troubled Pakistan has not been able to digest the setback yet.
The traditional display of bonhomie between Border Security Force (BSF) and Pakistan Rangers, border guarding forces of India and Pakistan respectively, was missing on Monday at Attari-Wagah border after Pakistan Rangers declined to receive sweets and exchange greetings with BSF to mark the religious occasion of Eid.
BSF’s deputy inspector general, BS Rawat was quoted as saying, “Pak Rangers conveyed us that they will not receive sweets or exchange greetings on the occasion of Eid.”
Personnel of the border guarding forces have traditionally exchanged sweets on religious and national festivals of the two countries, however, there have been various occasions in the past when this tradition has been dithered.
In June last year, on the occasion of Eid-ul-Fitr, BSF had refused to accept sweets and exchange greetings with Pak Rangers in protest against the killing of four BSF personnel including an assistant commandant rank officer by Pakistani Rangers along the international border in Jammu’s Ramgarh sector. Before this BSF had refused to follow the border tradition on January 26, 2018, the Republic Day due to continuous violation of ceasefire by Pakistan.
However, this time the refusal has come from Pakistan, which seems to be completely rattled after the abrogation of Article 370. India’s decision to repeal Article 370 and bifurcate Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories, left Pakistan completely unnerved with it’s Prime Minister Imran Khan calling a special session of parliament and launching an all-out campaign against India at all possible levels.
Besides threatening India by saying that “incidents like Pulwama are bound to happen again” Imran Khan had in a National Security Council meeting decided to severe trade between the two countries, downgrading bilateral diplomatic ties with India. The Wagah border was also closed and bus services were suspended by Pakistan.
Pakistan has decided to declare August 15 (India’s Independence Day) as ‘Black Day’ to protest against the action taken by India vis-a-vis Jammu and Kashmir. Along with these, they also expelled Indian envoy to Pakistan.
Along with this, Pakistan PM also directed the diplomats to open all channels to propagate their anti-India narrative. Spooked by India’s grit, Pakistan had also closed down its airspace for India-bound flights and flights operating from India.
Amongst the series of ineffectual decisions taken to protest against India’s audacious move of abrogating the provisions of Article 370 and bifurcating the state into two union territories, Pakistan had also announced that it will permanently discontinue Samjhauta Express train services.
Moreover, last week, Pakistan went on to ban Indian films from its cinemas to which the India film industry reacted by saying that the move does not make any difference to India and that it is Pakistan’s loss.
However, such foolhardy decisions taken by Pakistan will ultimately affect the parody nation and not India as Pakistan’s import from India is much more than India’s import from Pakistan.
Another incident of attack on kanwaris have emerged, this time from Budaun in Uttar Pradesh. An incident of stone-pelting on Kanwaris took place in Islamnagar area in Budaun when they were near an Idgah while returning with holy water.
According to reports, when a tractor-trailer carrying Kanwaris were passing near an Idgah during the Bakrid Namaj, some miscreants attacked the vehicle with stones. It is reported that Kanwaris were attacked for driving the tractor and playing music on the vehicle during Namaz.
Seeing the imminent danger, the tractor driver sped away from the place to protect the passengers. But the miscreants followed the vehicle for around 2 kilometres on the Budaun Bisauli road and surrounded it near Nai Basti forcing it to stop. There the attackers started pelting stoned on the Kanwaris, which caused injuries to several persons.
The attackers attacked the police also who had reached the spot, forcing them to escape. Women police constables had to take shelter in the office a petrol pump to protect themselves from the attackers.
After the attack, Kanwaris and other people blocked the Bisauli road protesting against the incident. Senior district and police officials from Badaun and Sambhal districts reached the spot with police reinforcement and brought the situation under control. They were able to convince the Kanwaris to lift the road blockade which continued for several hours.
American anti-Hindu bigoted analyst Christine Fair has called Indian journalist Rana Ayyub an ‘ISI stooge’.
It all started with this now-deleted tweet.
Christine Fair insinuating whether she tweets for ‘lifafa’
Rana had wished Eid Mubarak and put out special prayers for Kashmir. To that, Fair asked her why she is not putting out special prayers for Balochistan, Pashtun and the Kashmiris where Pakistan has illegally occupied Kashmir. She questioned Ayyub why no ‘special prayers’ for the Afghans being slaughtered by ‘your’ (presumably implying Pakistan Army) and ISI through their Taliban goons.
To that Fair was pointed out that Ayyub is an Indian and hence Fair should be ashamed of herself for insinuating that Ayyub speaks like a Pakistani.
Christine Fair insinuating that Rana Ayyub is an ISI stooge
In another now-deleted tweet, Fair pointed out that she does indeed know that Ayyub is an Indian but ‘if she tweets like an ISI stooge…’ Soon those who disagree with Ayyub ended up supporting Fair. However, Fair soon realised that she and Ayyub have a common enemy: Hinduism. She deleted her tweets and apologised to Ayyub while still maintaining that Ayyub’s integrity as a journalist is questionable.
3. My criticism of her content remains in place without apology.
4. Muslims in Indua are under threat and often told to “go to Pakistan” etc. I don’t want to be a part of that mob even while this does not mean her views are not subject to stern criticism.
Fair’s hatred for Hinduism can be inferred from the casual ‘gaushala’ and ‘cow’ jibe, which is something even the Pulwama terrorist who killed 40 CRPF soldiers in February this year, mentioned in his video which was released post the attack. He hated people who drink cow urine. Fair, too, casually brings in cow jibe because apparently easiest way to call out bigotry is more bigotry.
Okay COWkidar. I tweet about the Pandits frequently. Go back to your gaushalya. https://t.co/Yjr1Ume6BC
In South Indian and Sri Lankan Ramayanas, Ravana is the hero, Ram is a shmuck and Sita is the abused wife of a shmuck. And of course, I find myself in greater alignment with these versions because I share their assessment of Ram. He engages in spousal abuse and child abandonment. https://t.co/0jEF6dIgnZ
— (((Christine Fair))) (@CChristineFair) June 16, 2019
And frequent jibe on BJP supporters who had prefixed ‘Chowkidar’ prior to the 2019 General Elections.
If this happened near a mosque or church, COWkidars would spoil their chaddis:
“Guwahati: Headless body of woman found near Kamakhya temple, human sacrifice suspected.”https://t.co/2SmZSTWOq7
— (((Christine Fair))) (@CChristineFair) June 20, 2019
When Fair thought she was losing her identity as a Hindu-hater for attacking Ayyub, she quickly deleted her tweets and apologised to her for calling her an ISI stooge. Though she did maintain that Ayyub’s credentials are a journalist are questionable. Well, at least that is one thing we could agree on with the bigoted Fair. Recently, the Supreme Court had trashed Ayyub’s book ‘Gujarat Files‘ and said that it is based on surmises, conjectures and suppositions.
She has placed emphasis on her religion and showed her hypocrisy when journalist Bhupendra Chaubey refers to Aligarh murderers who were accused of brutally murdering a toddler, as ‘Muslim men’. However, Rana who pompously censured Chaubey for citing religious identity of the perpetrators had herself insinuated the assaulters who had raped a nun in Bengal of being supporters of RSS espousing the ideology of Hindutva. Rana had mentioned in her article how the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat and Subramanian Swamy’s utterances have acted as a catalyst for their supporters to attack the minorities. Towards the end, Rana alludes that the attack on the nun was not by the infiltrating Bangladeshis but by the followers of the RSS. It was later found out that the attack was indeed carried out by a Bangladeshi infiltrator and not by the ‘indoctrinated’ youths of the Hindutva fronts.
She also had an epic meltdown when her arch nemesis Amit Shah was made the Union Home Minister.
In an era of hyperbole, we ought to be careful enough not to contribute to the cacophony of wild ideas. However, when a pattern becomes too obvious, it is foolishness to ignore what is right before our eyes even if we do wish to believe it to be true. Such are the circumstances we find ourselves in when we consider the narrative surrounding the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A.
What has become obvious since 5th August is the concerted attempt by the Congress party and the liberal ecosystem to slander the government over the matter. Not merely that, efforts have also been made to jeopardize a sensitive situation. Without considering Kashmiri politicians such as Shah Faesal who are indulging in incitement quite openly, even the senior leadership of the Congress party has been toeing the Pakistani line.
Over time, the rhetoric hasn’t calmed down. In fact, the Congress party has only been escalating matters. Former Union Minister, P. Chidambaram, said on Monday that the BJP had abrogated Article 370 only because there was a Muslim majority in Kashmir. Digvijay Singh opined that India could lose Kashmir.
Former Congress President and son of the current party president, Rahul Gandhi, expressed concern over violence in Kashmir despite repeated assertions by the Indian government that the situation in the Valley was peaceful. Pakistan picked up the statement to further their twisted narrative on the issue.
Priyanka Gandhi, too, jumped on the matter. Significantly, she used the occasion of Eid to peddle her agenda. Her tweets were directly in contrast to the prevailing mood in Kashmir where people were celebrating Eid peacefully.
Imran Khan’s language, too, appears to be taken straight out of the liberal playbook. The very same words could have been tweeted by a liberal and people wouldn’t have been surprised.
I am afraid this RSS ideology of Hindu Supremacy, like the Nazi Aryan Supremacy, will not stop in IOK; instead it will lead to suppression of Muslims in India & eventually lead to targeting of Pakistan. The Hindu Supremacists version of Hitler’s Lebensraum.
How many liberals have advocated for a plebiscite in Kashmir? We certainly have politicians and prominent activists who never lose an opportunity to advocate for the same. In fact, it was just revealed by Abdul Basit that Shobaa De had written an article advocating for the same under the influence of Pakistani establishment. Consider this tweet by the Pakistani Prime Minister. How is it any different from what liberals have been advocating? Consistent with the Pakistani stand, liberals never care to mention the fact that for a plebiscite to occur, Pakistan must vacate PoK and China must vacate Aksai Chin.
It is time to end the long night of suffering for the people of Occupied Kashmir. They must be allowed to exercise their right to self determination according to UN SC resolutions.The only road to peace & security in South Asia runs through a peaceful & just settlement of Kashmir
Furthermore, neither of them addresses the issue of the genocide of Kashmiri Hindus. It’s an undeniable fact that the Kashmiri Muslim community monopolized the Kashmiri narrative by committing genocide and forcibly altering the demography of Kashmir. A plebiscite in a situation where one community has altered the demography in its favour by committing genocide is nothing short of an atrocity, that Kashmir is Indian land and no plebiscite in necessary to establish that is another matter. However, our liberals fail to address this matter, playing right into the hands of the Pakistani establishment.
It’s not only politicians who appear to be toeing the Pakistani line. Prominent media outlets, too, have been furthering the Pakistani narrative. Some have even received public endorsement from Pakistanis. The Quint, for example, quite unashamedly peddled Khalistani propaganda. The Pakistani establishment has been using NDTV’s coverage of the matter to further their interests.
Unfortunately, the signs have been visible for a long time. The bells should have started tolling when senior Congress leader went to Pakistan and sought their support to remove Prime Minister Modi from office and help Congress return to power. When Pakistan quoted the Quint, Karan Thapar and Praveen Swamy to brand Kulbhushan Jadhav a ‘RAW spy’ at the International Court of Justice, we should have paid more attention. When Navjot Singh Sidhu, then a Minister in the Punjab Cabinet, had gone to Imran Khan’s swearing-in ceremony and hugged the Pakistan Army’s chief after which his photo with a Khalistani terrorist had gone viral, these questions should have been asked.
Now, former Pakistani High Commissioner to India, Abdul Basit, has claimed that he had approached ’eminent’ journalist Shobhaa De for an article on Burhan Wani and had succeeded in influencing her enough to write an article to a tune of his preference. He was presumably referring to an article where Shobhaa De had asserted that a referendum should be held in Kashmir to resolve the matter once and for all.
How much evidence is proof enough of collaboration between the Pakistani establishment and liberals in India? How much more evidence do we need to assert that certain sections in India have been collaborating with Pakistan to undermine Indian national interests? These sections are not merely limited to Kashmir but often operate within the heart of Delhi. As dangerous as it sounds, and as much as we would like to deny such a thing, we can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to it.
As the situation along the border continues to remain tense after India abrogated Article 370, a rattled Pakistan has started moving its military equipment to the forward bases along the Ladakh border. A C-130 transport aircraft carrier of Pakistani Air Force was seen transporting equipment to the Skarduairbasee opposite to the India Union Territory of Ladakh.
According to the ANI report, the equipment that was moved to the forward air bases in Skardu maybe supporting equipment for carrying out fighter aircraft operations. The sources reveal that the government of India is closely monitoring the situation and keeping a close eye on the movement of Pakistanis across the border.
Pakistan reportedly owns some old C-130 aircraft procured from America a long time ago.
The sources believe that Pakistan might be moving a fleet of its Chinese made JF-17 fighter jets to the forward air base of Skardu that provides considerable aid to its army operations against India along the Jammu and Kashmir Line of Control. The Intelligence agencies are keeping a close watch across the length and breadth of Pakistan after India’s decision to repeal Article 370 evoked a sharp response from Pakistan.
On Monday last week, August 6, India took a momentous decision of abolishing Article 370 and bifurcating Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. Pakistan has since then been trying to internationalise India’s internal reorganisation and desperately pleading international organisations and countries to pressurise India into taking back the decision.
The United Nations Security Council had snubbed Pakistan by turning down its repeated entreaties to mediate in the Kashmir issue between India and Pakistan. Citing the Shimla Agreement signed between India and Pakistan, the UN chief claimed that the United Nations has no jurisdiction over Jammu and Kashmir issue and that the two country are supposed to resolve it bilaterally.
